Graffiti girl jailed for first offence

Come on folks, it is truly that simple. Phelps (or whatever his name is) got caught smoking pot. Big deal??? Yes...it is cause he broke the law.
It doesn't matter WHAT the act is (except for the degree of punishment), break the law...get punished.

But I guess I have to remember that we live in the United States of "lets drop the moral line to the lowest common denominator". Yeah...THAT will
make our country better...right???

Originally posted by WeAreAWAKE
Come on folks, it is truly that simple. Phelps (or whatever his name is) got caught smoking pot. Big deal??? Yes...it is cause he broke the law.
It doesn't matter WHAT the act is (except for the degree of punishment), break the law...get punished.

So... where are the police officers arresting Phelps for drug use? Where is the magistrate sending him to three months jail?

In this case, Phelps broke the law - and got away with it. So much for your fantasy that if you break the law you get punished. That only applies to
defenceless commoners who write their names on walls with textas.

ANYONE who says "she deserves it or that will teach her not to re-offend or serves her right" etc etc You may think high of yourself, but YOU ARE
SCUM, GET A GRIP ON REALITY, that is f****ed up, that's all I have to say.

*slaps self in face really, really hard* You have got be kidding me, and I thought we were lenient...what is
our Country coming to, was this judge just really high? You turn 18, and BOOM, you take a piss on the side of the road, get caught, and you hope to
God you don't get that judge! I'm surprised it even went to court, shouldn't it just be like a little fine? I guarantee I could go and write "suck
my balls" on a cafe wall, in s**t, and not get anything like that, what a poor girl.

I was referring to Phelps with the USA comment...but...it doesn't really matter...does it?

Phelps is loosing sponsors and (as I understand it) the local police want to charge him IF they can prove it WAS pot. Harder than one may think since
it was just a picture.

However...we make laws and hope and expect justice to be blind to who the person is, what color skin they have, etc. A black and white system...if
you did it...it is time to pay. Why? Because if this system is maintained and the rules enforced, people avoid committing the crime in the first
place.

In the US...gray has been added to the black and white. So now, the potential law breakers have to think..."I MAY get caught, and IF caught, MAY get
in real trouble, so I MAY get away with it." If the liberal judges and wishy-washy, bleeding heart people (including judges) in this (and every)
country would follow the law...black and white...some portion of this would change to "If I do this, I WILL get caught, and WHEN I get caught I WILL
go to jail"...there would be a lot less crime, high-speed chases to avoid police, drive-by shootings, and the other crimes where a "decision" leads
to the choice.

You will never get rid of the hate, rape, reaction murder etc...that spur of the moment thing. But lets let the law deter so we don't have to
continue this path of "IF" forver.

Originally posted by WeAreAWAKE
I was referring to Phelps with the USA comment...but...it doesn't really matter...does it?

Phelps is loosing sponsors and (as I understand it) the local police want to charge him IF they can prove it WAS pot. Harder than one may think since
it was just a picture.

However...we make laws and hope and expect justice to be blind to who the person is, what color skin they have, etc. A black and white system...if
you did it...it is time to pay. Why? Because if this system is maintained and the rules enforced, people avoid committing the crime in the first
place.

In the US...gray has been added to the black and white. So now, the potential law breakers have to think..."I MAY get caught, and IF caught, MAY get
in real trouble, so I MAY get away with it." If the liberal judges and wishy-washy, bleeding heart people (including judges) in this (and every)
country would follow the law...black and white...some portion of this would change to "If I do this, I WILL get caught, and WHEN I get caught I WILL
go to jail"...there would be a lot less crime, high-speed chases to avoid police, drive-by shootings, and the other crimes where a "decision" leads
to the choice.

You will never get rid of the hate, rape, reaction murder etc...that spur of the moment thing. But lets let the law deter so we don't have to
continue this path of "IF" forver.

(Snip)
if everything were black and white everyone would be in jail. maybe you should read the hundreds of thousands of laws there are, there is literally
something for everyone. how do you justify such a moronic statement when you don't even realize that people thrown in jail for minor crimes come out
worse than they went in. i suppose you think everyone should get the maximum penalty too. little bastard, prisons are overcrowded for this reason, but
that doesnt matter right? lock em up and throw away the key. do us all a favor leave the thinking up to people that are actually capable of it, you
should just go back to magic land, where there is no grey area, bad people are bad and good people are good, and the law is always right.

So I guess the brilliant idea here, is to ignore all crime, all laws etc? So we should get rid of the cops (they're pointless anyway with all the
restrictions placed upon them)...get rid of prisons and hell...while we are at it...just allow any country or rogue organization do as they please?
Or better yet...just let the half drunk judges decide on their far-too-often whims of liberalism.

Don't like the laws? Get up off your butt and do something about it instead of calling your elders "moronic" hidden behind a moniker in a computer
forum. However, if you want to live in a place where there is an understanding of right and wrong (assuming the reader understands the difference),
either accept the laws and abide by them, change them, or get the heck out. A person who thinks we should do nothing is worse than the people who
break the laws in the first place. They contribute to the widely-accepted notion of "yeah it's illegal...but who cares".

It also appears that the point of the laws being to protect the innocent, not just punish the criminals, has been forgotten in this "wonderful world
of no laws". I happen to be in law enforcement and have spent the past 20 years programming computers for police departments. I have seen the 80%
of the local crimes you (meaning the average public) doesn't even know occurs. I've seen the sick, the perverted and the down-right evil. Until
you do...trust me...hang on to the laws that still exist.

Oh...almost forgot...on the comment of "maximum" sentences...I would suggest a small term for the first time, a long term for the second and then a
final third strike. Just cause you asked.

TOUGHER laws for graffiti offences will outlaw the carrying of marker pens and etching implements in New South Wales in some instances, the
State Government says.

The laws, which come into effect today, follow last month's Government announcement that graffiti crime was escalating and costing NSW more than
$100 million a year.

The package of laws will help tackle the proliferation of graffiti, NSW Attorney General John Hatzistergos said.

"The community has had enough of having to repair damage left behind by this senseless crime,'' Mr Hatzistergos said.

The legislation makes it illegal to possess implements with the intention of using them to damage or deface premises or property, a law previously
applicable only to spray paint cans.

Fair Trading representatives and police officers will also be able to issue on-the-spot fines to retailers who fail to properly secure spray paint
cans.

Damaging or defacing property carries a fine of $2200 or six months jail, while possessing an instrument suspected of being used to graffiti
property attracts a fine of $1100 or three months jail.

That's right, people of the free world - carrying a texta in your pocket can see you jailed for three months if they think that you're
going to use it to write a tag.

Not true. Here is the bill. How about you read the actual laws instead of being a spoonfed media reactionary.

3 Definitions
(1) In this Act:
graffiti implement means any of the following:
(a) spray paint,
(b) a marker pen, (c) any implement designed or modified to produce a mark that is not
readily removable by wiping or by use of water or detergent.

See the last one. This means if you carry a marker that is easily removed, you have no problems. This means that law abiding citizens need only carry
this kind. This also means that graffiti artist(who want to have their tag remain permanent will easily be exposed as the a$$holes they truely are. I
can see why your empathy for these individuals is present.)

And the penalalty under this act for those who actually read the laws and not what the MSM tells us.

Possession of graffiti implement
(1) A person must not have any graffiti implement in the person’s
possession with the intention that it be used to damage or deface
premises or other property.
Maximum penalty: 10 penalty units or imprisonment for 3 months.
(2) A court that convicts a person of an offence under this section must not
sentence the person to imprisonment unless the person has previously
been convicted of an offence under this section or section 4 (or under
the corresponding provisions of the Summary Offences Act 1988 as in
force before their repeal by this Act) on so many occasions that the court
is satisfied that the person is a serious and persistent offender and is
likely to commit such an offence again.

The actual law and not a two paragraph bastardisation by the MSM and Tezza
Ohhh, I wonder if your girlfriend was a repeat offender under the old act of 1988, this act was repealed by the new act and that allowed offenders off
with warnings up tp three times before convicting them? hmmm. I wonder if her tag was actually on the Sydney City Council database? Whats that Tezza,
you didn't know the contracters that are hired to clean of graffiti actually record all incidences on digital cameras and save them in the event of a
conviction for tagging, I wonder if the prosecution table some of that, and warnings in the past that she may have recieved. Hmmmm.

Register of graffiti removal work
(1) A local council must keep a register of graffiti removal work carried out
in accordance with this Part.
(2) The register is to specify in respect of each incidence of graffiti removal
work carried out:
(a) the owner or occupier of the premises on which the graffiti was
situated, and
(b) the nature of the work carried out, and
(c) the actual cost, or an estimate of the cost at current market rates,
of carrying out the work.

What a great day to strip away more rights!!!

I don't here you screaming about the fact that councils have to, by law, waste more dollars, time and resources by having to create a system of
recording, costing and estimating just to cater for graffiti.

I don't hear you screaming about the fact that local council also have to remove graffiti from a private property if it is visible from a public
place, and that those councils will incur the cost and are also liable for any damages of removing that graffiti, under this new act, all local
residence now have lost their rights. Their rights to have resources allocated in a more meaningful way due to the way prolific graffit taggers and
vandals behave. Where is your outrage now. Where is your outrage at our loss. Thats right, you'd rather be seen as ATS cool and scream at the
"man", then help people in the real world.

(3)(3) The local council concerned is to bear the cost of graffiti removal work
referred to in subsection (1).

(5)A local council must pay compensation for any damage caused by the
council in this section.

No reference whatsoever to the vandal incurring any costs, how about that for rights.

Yes, defacers of public property, taggers of the world, I can just see the civil libertarian rushing to defend you. Ohhh the silence.
Tezza, here is a link where you can make submissions to the Government relating to all gross miscarriage of justice. www.parliament.nsw.gov.au...

No knee-jerk. Years and months in the making.
The only knees i see jerking(amonst other things I am sure) is you. As per usual.

And at the end of the day, this will be the norm. For all you think tankers out there that want it judged from an individuals perspective......here
you go.

15 Alternative action to imposing penalty for graffiti offences under
sections 4 and 5 A court may, instead of imposing a fine on a person or sentencing the
person to imprisonment for an offence under section 4 (Damaging or
defacing property by means of graffiti implement) or 5 (Possession of
graffiti implement):
(a) make an order under section 8 (1) of the Crimes (Sentencing
Procedure) Act 1999 directing the person to perform community
service work, being an order containing a recommendation of the
kind referred to in section 91 of that Act, or
(b) make an order under section 5 of the Children (Community
Service Orders) Act 1987 requiring the person to perform
community service work, being an order containing a
recommendation of the kind referred to in section 5 (1A) of that
Act, as the case requires.

No terra here, just over the top trolling.
I mean, just look at the signature. OP.
This article is from today, I linked this bill over two weeks ago. How slow are you.
Here is where I linked it as Graffiti-NSW law link and the bill is in the first paragraph as a linked
PDFpost by atlasastro
Man, and you complain about the PTB, only to wait for the MSM(of all people) to inform you of what is actually happening. Unbelievable. Deny
Ignorance.

Originally posted by alyosha1981What do you mean "screwing up the rest of your life" haven't you ever heard of juvienille record
expongement? sorry

In the UK, for a Criminal Record Bureau check even offences committed as a minor now have to be divulged. There's no real "expongement", as you put
it. Employers generally want disclosure up front, which, in a way, is useful because a potential employee gets to state their side of what happened,
which isn't always obvious when the CRB check comes through with just the 'bald facts'. Often, relatively small crimes can look horrific if just
the charge and the sentencing comes appears on paper.

but if a kid has a DOP on their recor and they can't find a job later on in life then there's deffinatly more issues going on then just the
record.

That's not necessarily true. At one time in the UK, that a conviction was classed as 'spent' - that time frame connected to any applicable
conditions relating to the sentence had now passed - was generally enough for most employers. However, thanks to the government creating a 'climate
of fear' and increasingly competitive job markets, this is becoming more and more of an issue than it was, say 10 years ago.

Your point about there "deffinatly more issues going on then just the record" doesn't actually hold any more.

The Above Top Secret Web site is a wholly owned social content community of The Above Network, LLC.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.